The real stories from inside the F1 paddock

A London GP… How about one on Mars?

It is no great surprise that on the morning after the sentencing in Germany of Dr Gerhard Gribkowsky to a lengthy prison term for accepting a bribe in the sale process of the Formula One group – and the obvious questions that arise from that verdict – there is a story in the English newspapers, led by The Times, that there will be a Grand Prix on the streets of London.

Magicians achieve much of their magic by using distractive techniques to draw the audience’s attention away from whatever it is they are up to. Emphatic gestures, a drum roll and a crash of cymbals, or a flash-bang with smoke. The magician orchestrates his words and actions so that the spectators are looking at what he wants them to look at, rather than what he does not want them to see.

A Grand Prix on the streets of London makes no sense at all in real terms and the people at The Times simply end up looking foolish for having gone down this path. One can only hope that they did so wittingly, perhaps currying favour with the F1 boss, rather than printing such a load of guff because they actually believe it is possible. If Mr E has convinced them it is real, then good for him, although alarms would have started sounding for me if he had mentioned that the Formula One group might even pay for the event itself. Clearly the story would have no legs if there were doubts about funding.

However, I can only wonder what CVC Capital Partners and its friends from Kansas would make of someone agreeing to reduce its profits by a sizeable chunk. Funding a race on its own would require the Formula One group to pay various parties: the teams would want the usual money for an additional race; if there were no fees coming in from a local promoter that would mean around $30 million would need to be found. Add to that about the same sort of money to create the infrastructure needed and you can see that this would be a major financial undertaking, with only the gate money in return. So there might be 120,000 people. If they each paid $200, that would raise $24 million. You see the problem? These investor types would not go for that because that would impact on their bottom line. F1 gains nothing by boosting the local economy, which is why local governments pay for races, but in the case of London the impact would be lessened.

Depending on who you believe, London is the world’s top tourist destinations, ahead of New York and Paris. Whatever the case, it is in the top three. Its hotel rates and occupancy rates are higher than ever before, with 92.4 percent last summer and even better figures expected this year because of the Olympic Games. This means that the economic impact of an event such as a Grand Prix are limited because the money is already there. All that would happen would be different people in the hotel rooms. Perhaps they would pay over the odds, but London prices are already very high so the economic benefits would be less dramatic than in other cities where they need to fill the beds; and London hardly needs any more global advertising.

Disruption would be another question, just as it is an issue in any major city where a race track runs through the centre. The only way to avoid the kind of criticism that happens in Singapore, where the tracks cuts major traffic arteries, is to have the circuit running in and around a park. Unlike Albert Park in Melbourne, it would be hard to get the whole event into one of London’s existing facilities and have the kind of landmarks one would want to see. It is not impossible but 30 years ago Autosport ran just such an idea in one of its April 1 editions…

This is all rather academic in my opinion because there is no real likelihood of such an event happening. Silverstone has an F1 contract that runs until 2027 (yes, really) and that means that there would need to be two GPs in Britain, at a time when the concept of two races per country is deemed to be rather old-fashioned (and unnecessary). I am sure that if I dug around for a bit, I could find a quote for Bernie on that subject.

While I would love to see a Grand Prix in London and think that it would be good for the sport, I do feel that this idea will fade quietly away, having done its job of deflecting attention away from the important question of today: what are the implications of the Gribkowsky guilty verdict?

The cynic in me says that a man who has nothing to hide does not need to use the old magician tricks, but I prefer to wait and see what the prosecution service decides to do before making any judgements on the rights and wrongs of the Gribkowsky Affair.

Share this:

Related

174 Responses

nothing to do with Santandar’s promotional event at all then? What a great bit of marketing. This is all a piece of fluff to sell bank accounts. Why else would Jenson and Lewis be involved. The poor journos have been sold a pup by a bank. Not for the first time.

It has been reported today in a number of “LONDON” newspaper, and if you read them carefully, you sort of get the message that Bernie is paying, not CVC, but Bernie, I think with his “Promoter Hat” on. Of course Boris is in on the act, as usual.
There is talk of 2 GP in London. One around the Olympic site, and of course the one that has been talked about off and on for years around Hyde Park. One newspaper talk about how the Royal Family might object to the race, and already people are saying we have more than enough world class events in London.
As Joe has mention, it takes away the story about Bernie paying a German Banker, and of course Barclays Bank is stealing the headlines right now. So Bernie has done it again, pushed an important story off the front pages, about him and replaced it with a more positive image of F1 and himself.

Interesting. There were talks about a GP in Rome, a GP in Paris (and recently the New Jersey GP that may or may not become a reality). Thing is, I wouldn’t think it would boost tourism that much in these already high-profile cities to be worth blocking the city centres for a week or two in the high season.

Good marketing for F1 perhaps, but very difficult to execute.

When the Hungarian GP was established in 1986, there were talks about holding it in the Népliget park in the middle of Budapest where the “original” 1936 GP was held – at least this was Bernie’s idea – but the organisers took some measures and found that the benefits of making a race in the middle of the capital were minute compared to the costs and the problems with logistics during race weekends, so they voted to build a brand new track outside the city (i.e. the Hungaroring). And if someone says that a GP at Budapest is hardly comparable to a race in e.g. Paris, let’s not forget that the Hungarian GP is de facto the race of Eastern Europe. Half of a whole continent and some more! That’s why it was made to host 120,000 spectators (one of the biggest venues on the current calendar in this respect).

I wonder if they were able to pull off the original idea, would the venue be adaptable to constantly renewed standards.

These kind of races might run for 5-10 years (minus Monaco), but if they can’t provide something extra special they are hardly sustainable IMHO.

$200 a ticket? Thats about or a little more what GA is for most races is, and the cheapest stands are $200, with the most expensive adding a 0 onto that, so I think the numbers could add up. Plus the trackside advertising for a London GP would surely be available to rent out at a higher price than Silverstone.

But yes, no chance at all it’ll happen unless you want to move the Wellington Memorial, Buckingham Palace fountain etc etc…

Pretty sure Bernie has forgotten the price of a pint of milk…you wonder if he said to the Times “I’ll pay for everyone to go as well” if they’d believe him…still good to see it put F1 on the front page of a couple of newspapers. How much would adverts like that cost for the British GP…

Don’t forget that there is a huge industry around the “Olympic legacy”. So far they’ve achieved bugger all at huge cost, this won’t just be Bernie distracting attention from his alleged crimes but also the LOCOG lot trying to cover their backsides.

Metro spun the story slightly differently, saying that Santander are the ones who have funded the glossy promotional pictures and the ideas. It’s obviously not a coincidence that McLaren’s two drivers have stated their support. The implication was Santander would pay for it.

All pie in the sky of course, but an excellent plug for Santander as well as distracting from Mr E’s little German problem as well as fellow bank Barclays’ little problem too…

Rather a clumsy attempt by Bernie to distract from the Gribkowsky trial result, which just makes him and the Times journalist involved look a bit silly. Good publicity for Santander though.

Surely Silverstone should have something in the contract that stipulates no other races in the UK? Seems like common sense to me.

If this is the best Bernie can manage, it’s a good job he’s not a magician.

Any word on whether he will be brought to book over the Gribkowsky affair yet Joe? I would have assumed that there would be some rather immediate developments after the guilty verdict, that meant Bernie would be getting a visit from some rather large German policemen? Do you think that he’ll ever be brought to book for what has been found to be bribery? Or was it discussed in such a way that it was not proven to be such?

The problem for journalists here is that if they start talking about potential court cases or tax investigations for Bernie, suddenly passes to races get withdrawn. Drivers and team people mysteriously stop being available for interview. Law suits start arriving in the mail – which are ruinously expensive even if there is nothing to them. Such is the difficulty of writing about billionaires – they have tremendous power. Even MPs and the police (!) kept shtum in the face of Murdoch’s obviously malign influence.

The teams NEVER say anything about the Emperor’s New Clothes (remember Adam Parr?). Nor do the FIA officials. Nor do the drivers. And with very few exceptions, nor do the broadcasters or print journalists. JS is a brave and honourable exception.

Jean Todt is a lot more forgiving than his predecessor, but Bernie never seems to forget a slight. I cannot imagine any journalist retaining his credentials if he truly dug up dirt on Mssr. Ecclestone.

My point was that he’s living evidence of what can happen when a credentialed F1 journalist publishes unflattering stories about the true powers of the sport. Credentials can and have been rescinded.

The situation is doubtless better since Max’s departure, but even today were a credentialed F1 journalist to run a truly damaging expose about Mr. E, I don’t for a minute believe he’d let it slide.

There may be an innocent explanation for why the credentialed F1 media rarely publish damaging items about Ecclestone. Maybe it’s because Bernie is just a scrupulously clean, unflinchingly respectable businessman who is so completely above suspicion that he doesn’t have any secrets worth revealing? No? 🙂

Don’t get me wrong, I’m definitely not throwing stones at you or any other journo. I realize it’s a crappy situation all around and I doubt I’d do any better. My point is only that a certain level of self censorship does exist, I’ve heard it directly from long-time F1 journalists.

Roebuck has a pass but does not use it much these days. I have written far worse things than Roebuck ever wrote and the worst I have ever had was a suggestion that I might be more positive. The point you miss is that smart people do not push people out because they know an enemy outside has less fetters than a critic within. Criticism is accepted if it is fair. We may have discussions about what is right and what is fair, but in my experience the only action taken was against those who were not right nor fair.

NO ONE could afford to get on Max’s bad side, not drivers, not team owners, not multi-billion dollar automobile manufacturers – just ask Honda.

Clearly, there was no hesitation to go after those with large soap-boxes and even larger bank accounts. One finds it difficult to imagine that anyone was immune, least of all the relatively impoverished F1 press corps.

Bernie has always been far more forgiving of perceived slights than was Max, but if a truly damaging expose were to be published by a pass holder, I have to wonder at the consequences. Perhaps we’ll never know – truly damaging revelations about Mr E almost never come from the credentialed F1 press.

Max’s motivation has always been clear. He desires power for the sake of it.

I very much doubt anyone held anything over his head. When the prostitute scandal broke, he simply owned up. I expect he’d have done the same had anyone tried to blackmail him.

I suspect that had Max not had his fascist liabilities, he would have instead found a very bright future in British politics. Since it’s hard to win an election when your parents were married by Hitler, he went to Formula One.

When Max took over the FIA Presidency he stated he would not interfere with F1 as it looked after itself. This was not the case as we have all witnessed.

Max possesses a rather large intellect which he enjoyed pitting against some of the over inflated egos in the paddock, you know who they are… and it’s hardly suprising a sting was conspired against him.

To his credit he survived where most others would have crumbled,
and still the silence…

Max himself points no fingers, save at a bunch of lowlife journos and false prurience.

You think he’d pull punches if he thought he was set up?

Think about it, the inquiry has the power of a court and you can say what you like without fear of libel . . .

. . .

For the record, my view is that if anyone did not want Max in politics, it would be politicians, not Bernie or Ron or F1 anybody. I also believe he had long overcome his background, until that NOTW rubbish. Nota, that Ole Rupe is jettisoning his entire news ops now. That must have taken some arm twisting.

This whole idea that Max M is some kind of outcast is just rot. I agree with who above says it’s our loss.

We surely have the proof before us. The most critical articles about Bernie come from journalists who are not known for writing about F1 (politics, business, arts, world affairs scribes) but the glowing reports are usually written by F1 journalists. The London Grand Prix rumour was started by an F1 jounalist and we still see sports reports about it right now. At the same time the politics and world affairs journalists are writing that it is a very bad idea!! There is the answer to the question!

Nullius is right about the power that the F1 teams and Bernie have on the limp journalists in the sport. There is even a public example of this because in March the Skyy News was forced to remove an article because the teams made a complaint about it!!!! If you do not believe me have a look at the report on the link below.http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/068a0618-71f2-11e1-8497-00144feab49a.html#axzz1zCcBCSsd
This was a really damaging revelation and the teams crushed on it. This is the first time I have heard about this happening but one time is enough to make proof. If journalists start talking about things which are upsetting for Bernie or the teams then they are stopped.

Bring back the Grand Prix of Gibraltar. They would have to pay the estate of Peter Ustinov for the marketing rights of course. I have just managed to get a CD of this, having worn my cassette tape out years ago. It is almost as funny as the idea of a GP in central London. Actually they could use a bendy bus as a course car.

Given that I am a Londoner I know how incapable this city is of doing anything. A city that has been faffing around trying to build a runway for years whilst China is building 70 airports. A city where transport is cripplingly expensive, dirty, overcrowded, unreliable and relies on Victorian era infrastructure. A city incapable of even remotely meeting the housing needs of its inhabitants. A city whose police cannot stop the wanton destruction and looting of local business. A city that requires multiple committees to decide whether to install a zebra crossing. A city so vehemently anti-motorist that driving is an experience akin to water torture.

Delivered the Olympics ahead of schedule, and how many other cities are there in the world with a dodgy airport, poor traffic, anti motorist… London’s great, try moving away for a bit and when you come you’ll realise it.

Just because other cities can be worse doesn’t make it right. London isn’t Mogadishu I’ll give you that.

BTW I was in France for the Monaco GP, went there by TGV. Amazing service and designed in the 70s, and we’re still umming and aahing about it in the 2010s, one line between two cities, it’s pathetic. Nice has a fantastic tram system that is cheap, Marseilles has a great Metro network..

I came back to “London” Stansted and was immediately charged more for one ticket to get into London than I’d spent the whole week in France.

Bernie is such a cad. I’ve learnt so much about his tactics from this blog that I immediately think ‘if he’s showing the right hand whats he got in the left’. Yes, absolute tosh .. although I would say anyone stupid enough to pay for the Olympics is potentially stupid enough to pay for a GP .. poor hacks, seem to be looking in the wrong direction, the real story is in Munchen!

It was a motor racing fan and Birmingham owner of ‘the opposite lock nightclub’ who instigated the Birmingham Superprix with the first race in 1985.

Torrential rain in its first year, with a win for Jean Alesi in the Formula 3000 race, the Birmingham Superprix was a tremendous event for the City.

For the first time visitor, to any form of motor racing, there was a surreal sense of anticipation when you approched this city centre race track even from a mile or more away, when you would hear these strange angry cars…

Birmingham is the only city in the UK that has an act of Parliament allowing it to close public roads for motor racing. Brummies were lucky to witness Formula 3, Thundersports, Porsche Supercup and many other categories, racing through the city centre streets at speeds approaching 185mph.

The Leaders of UK plc need to re-think their marketing strategy when promoting Britain around the world and understand there is more to life outside the M25, please.

The ‘opposite lock nightclub’ is alas no more and was located by Gas Street canal basin, in the city centre. I declare an interest as i have been an adopted brummie since 1977.

Great piece again Joe, you are the only reporter so far who shines a light on a different site of the story.

Another question, I’ve read in the German Bild Zeitung that the Daimler-concern could quit if this bribe scandal with Mr. Ecclestone is proven. It had something to do with an act that they have signed in which they state that corruption is not allowed. Could this be true or is it just a mere threat by Mercedes to get things they want after all the trouble they had with the Concorde Agreement.

I’ve just seen the map of the proposed circuit. The spectacle will be amazing.

Especially the bit 300m after the start when 24 cars jostling for position across a 6 lane start straight, now travelling at 150+mph, all form up into a single file to pass through the single carriageway Admiralty Arch. (Its big, its stone, its narrow,…its hard!……………… its genius).

Better still at the end of the first lap when still jostling in close company the cars will effectively be accelerating toward a brick wall with a crack in it at about 205mph.

How about getting some online sim game like iracing to create a London circuit and have the F1 drivers to get on their computers and race it? I watched one of their attempts back in the fall to have NASCAR and other drivers such as Bobby Labonte, Scott Speed and Tommy Kendall race 25 laps at Charlotte in a truck and 25 laps at Watkins Glen in a Mazda roadster. Actually quite fun since these guys didn’t have much to lose by making gambles and crashing out.
Alright, it’s a screwy idea. But people once laughed at TV putting on reality shows and poker games, But it’s more likely to happen than an actual London race. besides, with Silverstone drawing so well and it being relatively close to London, why take chances on diluting your audience with too much product?
Besides, doesn’t Montreal work in part because it is on an island in the St Lawrence that is only a recreation area, yet is connected to their subway/metro?
Monaco works, well, because it is Monaco. As Steve Matchett once noted, Monaco is essentially a sleepy Mediterranean fishing village with a casino and automobile race. And Singapore is an authoritarian paternalistic state.

I do remember years ago when long distance sports racing was dying on its arse that somebody suggested that to make it more interesting they should start all even qualifiers in a clockwise direction and all odd number quali’s anti-clockwise. Normal rules of the road would apply as regards overtaking, and at the 500km mark the bloke that invented the series was to be sent out to repaint the centre white lines with a pot and brush.

Setting aside the merits (or otherwise) of a London Grand Prix, BCE is reported in The Times as saying “WE” would be prepared to front up the £35million required to promote the event. Of course, it isn’t clear if the Royal ‘we’ is CVC or the Bambino Trust…..but I wonder what the better deal is: £28M to stop Gribkowsky ratting on Ecclestone’s debatable use of Bambino Trust, or £35M to influence HMG from looking too deeply into Ecclestone andBambino? Either way, my mind goes back to 1997, and a £1million donation to the Labour party. Transparent or what?

An interesting consequence of the Gribkowsky conviction is that it opens up the possibility of Bernie being tried for tax evasion, because (a) he appears to have directed Bambino to pay Gribkowsky, despite not being supposed to have any control over it, for it to operate as a trust, and (b) he paid Gribkowsky because he (Grib) supposedly threatened to shop him (Bernie) to the authorities re his tax affairs, which rather suggests there was something to hide. The key point here is that Bernie would be tried for tax evasion in the UK, not in Germany. This would be quite separate from any criminal charges relating to the alleged bribe which would need to be heard in Germany (and for that matter, in Bavaria) since LB Bayern is the “victim” of that particular episode.

Given the above, it is revealing that Bernie appears today to be offering to pay (£35m?) out of his own pocket to stage a London GP, no doubt in return for any tax questions going away.

Another question raised by the Grib conviction is whether it opens up the possibility of a legal challenge by LB Bayern to CVC’s ownership of the F1 shares, it it can be proved that the sale only went through because of the alleged bribe .. .

Thank goodness…..a REAL F1 journalist, who is able to give and express his own, individual and original opinion.
I am becoming more and more distraught in the sheer laziness and complete lack of professional drive by the other collection of Racing Websites.

As you are aware, these sites just reproduce the Press Releases issued by the Teams….pretty much verbatim.
Please look at NewsNowF1 for confirmation…..the same word for word stories….by a myriad of Publications from all over the world!

Having worked in F1 for over 12 years now, i recall Kimi reading a copy of an every-thursday-published-Racing magazine….and asking me ‘What does this word mean…?”
I then explained what the word meant to him…..and laughed when i saw it was in a quote apparently uttered from his own mouth!!! In fact, it was just another meaningless, bland and completely ‘Correct’ piece of drivel from the Woking press office…..

These other ‘journalists’ are happy to receive hospitality from the Teams in the Paddock….maintain their own sense of importance….and are happy that their Pass admits them to the Paddock every other week.
If too many of them started asking the real questions, all of a sudden, the Pass will fail to work at the next event….

This was covered on the BBC today programme on radio 4 this morning with a very positive gushy spin – and I chuckled into my branflakes in the light of your recent previous comments on Bernie and the press – great idea – total kite flying and generous BCE is contributing £35 Million – mostly by waiving the fee to run it – wow!!

Also bet the British GP organisers were delighted to hear about it!! BCE not very subtle on this occasion I am afraid

just been on Sky News now. odd that Mr E can get Sky News to run with his smokescreen and yet he couldn’t pull the strings to get Sky News into Bahrain. oh silly me, perhaps he didn’t want Sky News asking all sorts of bothersome questions….

Joe,
Forty eight years ago, me and my mates would pound round our proposed London GP course in Hyde Park in our clapped out Austin Mini van and dream of what could be. The track went down Park Lane (in the northbound lane) to Hyde Park Corner, along the S Carriage Way to the end, turned right and across the park and Serpentine to Bayswater Road or the N Carriage Way then turn right and up to Marble Arch.
Of course it didn’t have a prayer of succeeding then, and a London GP has even less of a chance now, quite simply because of all the points you have made here.
Living now in Canada and being a regular visitor to the Palisades area of New Jersey, I’m amused by the uneducated speculation on this blog by people who don’t know the area, the geography or know about Leo Hindery the promoter. This man is a racer (won his class at Le Mans), knows racing, is a billionaire and is politically well connected to put it mildly. Will the race happen? I’d put damn good money on it. The only fly in the ointment I can see is a local resident’s group getting an injunction on thr race happening and slowing down the preparation plans. The same problem arose 35 years ago in Long Beach and I seem to remember Chris Pook dealing with that problem by paying for the objectors to have an expenses paid long weekend vacation away from town……..worked a treat!

Hehe, I was in the bank this morning and heard on the radio they have there about the proposed new London West End Grand Prix as they called it. I couldn’t wait to get back here to post on your inevitable blog piece about it:

“Grib-who-sky?”

as someone so wittily did the other day on the 23 races story… only to find that you’ve made that the basis of the article. As I guess I should have known you would.

A Scottish Grand Prix on the Streets of Edinburgh would make a lot more sense! With a DRS zone stretching the length of the Royal Mile, and the Start/Finish line at the castle. Jackie Stewart could wave the tartan flag at the end, and Pirelli would have to come up with (at least) two different wet tyre compounds

Genius. If ever there was a time, it’s now! With Princes Street having been a sandpit for pretty much 3.5 years over the tram works people would just think the disruption of building a circuit was a continuation and blame the council. I reckon I could get a pretty decent view of the cars coming through Charlotte Square from my office window. Down with the trams – bring on the GP!

They are talking about building an international standard race track near me in Wales but of course we are not looking to go it alone…. I think they could build a track in a shorter time than it would take parliament to pass the necessary bill allowing road racing in the capital. Bernie might not be around by then, god or the law might have a say in that.
Perhaps Bernie is pushing the buck house layout to cause a stir whilst secretly favouring the Olympic park track.

What ever happened to the Rome GP idea that was going around? Wasn’t there an actual agreement for that?

A London GP would be a spectacular event, especially with so many large roads to plot it around. There’s a very accurate depiction of London in a racing video game called Metropolis Street Racer / Project Gotham Racing that has many circuits set around real-life London and many of those layouts would work well for an F1 track.

Karen,
Let’s just say, that your Boss did pull a rabbit out of his hat and there was this proposed London GP, around the Park. What do you think would be realistic viewing figures for a race like this? I guess it breaks down to free to air or subscription.

Initially it would have ‘new race’ cache, then it would rely on its location just as much as the on track action, Valencia is 4 places higher than Spa despite usually having less than dramatic races, this has to be due to location, although quite ironically this years race was hugely exciting, and got similar viewing figures on the BBC to last years race, despite Sky broadcasting at the same time and the BBC’s drop in viewers … If this years European GP had happened last year, instead of 3.8m (1.1m above BBC average), one could have reasonably expected 5m.

Almost certainly it would out perform Silverstone, as the casual viewer would take an interest in the back drop, in a similar way the London marathon has/would have a larger audience than a similar marathon run through parkland.

In the UK Silverstone gets around 5m unique viewers, I would expect London to start at 7m and sustain 6m (if the old TV model were still in place)

However with the BBC viewing figures down 37.16%, and combined BBC/Sky viewing down 22.31%, it would depend on who got to broadcast it, Sky are only averaging 706k per race (so far).

In fact Sky’s total combined unique viewing figures for all their live races this year, up to and including Canada are exactly the same as the BBC got for the British GP alone in 2011.

Thank you for the numbers Karen – I hope there is somebody at the BBC hanging their heads in shame over this. But they’re probably not as they’re all at Wimbledon enjoying the hospitality no doubt.

The most striking thing to come from this (apart from Sky’s dismal figures) are that this split has done nothing apart from lose part of the overall viewership. I can plead guilty on that one because I came back to the house just as the safety car was going round at the last race. Sad to say but F1 doesn’t take priority necessarily these days.

Karen, re your last comments – this is concerning, more than one would think. OK, it’s early days for Sky at the moment, being its first year, but if the BBC decide to drop F1 altogether (possible) it would push F1 into becoming a niche sport in the UK, more it is at the moment. Even Silverstone, normally a sell-out – unlike many other venues around the world, might feel the effects of a drop in TV audience figures and a lack of interest in general.

It would appear that CVC are ready to drop F1 when market conditions are right which will leave the business being run by yet more faceless corporate types who, will in turn, do the same (if they’re lucky). There is a finite period for BE’s tenure so what happens next? We wait with baited breath.

The FIA, under Max Mosley, completely dropped the ball as far as putting a coherent plan going forward for F1, in return for a paltry sum of money (even apparent at the time). Consequently the sport’s governing body will never again get anywhere near control of F1 other than tweaking the rules.

Anyhow – no TV, no coverage, no F1. I think it is all rather sad myself.

@Keith … I would imagine London would see a global audience slightly bigger than Singapore.

@David Hope … Yes Wimbledon give out vast amounts of freebies which easily turn the heads of the public school boys at the BBC, whereas F1 cannot offer … ‘tickets to Grand Prix events, Paddock Passes and the Paddock Club to any person in a manner which is intended to, or may appear to, improperly induce others, or be seen as an attempt to improperly influence the outcome of a business decision.’

Yes, one would have reasonably expected the viewing figures to be higher than last year given the nature of the 2 seasons, but it seems that viewers are not interested in highlights (BBC or Sky), despite the BBC intimating that the highlights would likely get more viewers than the live races.

I think the highest Sky race highlights figure was 52,000k, and the BBC’s was 3.6m, a loss of 1.1m (average) over the live race, and loss of 2m (peak) over the live event.

@Steve Deakin … Sky have to hope to get full broadcasting rights, as their first year is likely to be a honeymoon year … Although keeping F1 off the higher premium Sports channels have increased their share of the viewers.

It’s quite easy to get Sky F1, as Sky seem to be giving away 100s of Sky boxes every week, this however is to try and off-set the huge churn factor.

Yes if any sport is given enough TV exposure it will become part of the collective consciousness of a nation, but the reverse is also true.

The FIA didn’t want to off-load F1, the European Commission forced them to.
And no one could have foreseen how much Mr. E would be able to grow the sport … Yes in hindsight the FIA could/should have received more money, and definitely have kept control of the rights with FOM administering them, but it was a political decision to strip the commercial rights to F1 from the FIA.

The FIA have recently taken back the rights to the rally championship, without the EC batting an eyelid … Draw your own conclusions about that.

I think it should be added that was with the situation at the time, where there were clashes if interest between FOM and the FIA. There is nothing to stop the FIA going back to the European Commission with a new structure and having its own promotional division if the existing deal ever falls out of bed. FOM was part of the problem, as much as being the solution.

Bernie’s other hand is probably meanwhile busy preparing in case the Germans want to charge him. As he has suggested, he could sue Gribkowski for defamation and the German court for saying he is guilty without trial. Then he can claim that it will be impossible to get a fair trial in Germany, (“Look they already said I’m guilty”)

This whole Olympic kick with Sochi and now London was inspired by one of many business strategy proposals sent to Mr. E this one mooting Vancouver as a possible North American F1 stop back when Montreal seemed iffy and Austin was only known as a music festival town. Like the several proposals sent before Mr. E ‘borrowed’ the part that served his best interests and ignored the rest. History will prove to repeat itself as the fall-out from Germany spreads.

Start/finish: has to be Park Lane I guess, with pits n paddock on one side.
Then down Hyde Park Corner, Constitution Hill, Horsguards Parade, up side of St James’ Park, then up Grosvenor Place back to Park Lane. Or for a longer lap make a detour into Parliament Sq, then back up Victoria Place past Westminster Abbey.

Isnt this nothing more then Bernie distracting people from the Bribary claims. I doubt anyone without some knowledge on what Mr E is like, will fail to spot the immaculate timing of him promoting (and saying he’l pay for) a London GP. It is nothing more then Bernie trying to stop all the inevitable bad news about him and Mr Gribkowsky getting into the presses highlighting any possible legal action he might be facing.

On a London GP, can’t see it happening. Its a wonderful city, no doubt there. But a London GP is a daft idea to reign over all other daft ideas.

I actually start to think that the United States Grands Prix are a test on audiences and race organizers, and right now we are witnessing a massive revolution.

So many years going by without an F1 race in the USA and all of a sudden two of them are announced. One on a “conventional”, purpose-built track, one on a city circuit. This, and all the talks from the past of GPs in Rome, Paris, now London and New Jersey, and the established Valencia and Singapore GPs started me thinking.

Perhaps Bernie wants to create the ultimate legacy and move F1 entirely into cities? Is he now testing the effect of a GP in a country on a racetrack and in a city at the same time? Is he actually racing races head to head and lt the winner rule?

Because, why not? It is a lot more beneficial marketing tool for a COUNTRY/CTIY to have a race actually inside a city where people live than somewhere out in the fields (but do read what I’ve written above on the Hungarian GP).

Everybody would like to see a private Monaco GP as their own. Valencia and Singapore definitely has some imprint from it (or Long Beach for that matter).
.
Why have a race at a place where _motorsport fans_ GO rather than where _people in general_ ARE and then some more. A lot bigger and wider audience that is, and perhaps a win-win situation if a government sees an opportunity for boosting local tourism.

Most probably I’m overthinking this, but I wouldn’t be surprised if some of the “minor” or “boring” events on the calendar would be swapped by new, city races in the near future (by e.g. more countries from the Middle-East), or see some of the “classic” races currently not on calendar being revived as city races (e.g. France, Mexico, Argentina, etc.)

I’m just wondering why no one is thinking of a Hull GP. You’ve got the skyline, coastal scenery, urban chic, architectural interest. For discerning folk like Joe and his journalistic colleagues there are top 3 and 4 star hotels, bars, brasseries and whatnot, the last surviving “Golden Egg’ eateries. You’ve got a knowledgeable local populace that eats drinks and breathes Formula 1.
Now, how about Bernie flashing some of his own cash over here?

As usual Joe, you manage to see through the machinations of Mr E and his unswerving ability to deflect attention from the point that we all REALLY want the story of! I read the various ‘london GP’ stories this week with the same degree of cynicism I usually reserve for rumours emanating from Bernies self run press office, but at least all others who reported did not do themselves the disservice that the Times has by not even mentioning the recent happenings in Germany. Those who do not follow the sport as closely as I do ( or indeed at all) have the right to have these things reported in context to allow them to make up their own minds as to the relevance of the story in the REAL world. Good reporting Joe, keep it up.

If you criticized him fairly then I would not care. But you are unreasonable and unfair. All drivers say the right things for the sponsors. That is part of their job. Lewis is a good guy. A lot of them are. But he is one of the most exciting drivers in F1 at the moment and there is no reason for any fan to have such violent views.

Bernie’s balloon again, the harder you blow the bigger it gets! This mangy old rabbit comes out of the hat again, when Bernie needs a distraction from press focus on his own affairs. Eight days disruption on major traffic routes through the West End, plus the enormous noise, why would London need that? Other major city grand prix are in in parks, dock areas or on islands. In Melbourne, residents flee to the country annually to escape this!

I can’t help thinking of the Mel Brooks film ‘The Producers’! Perhaps someone has come up with a scheme where you can make lots of money but only by getting people to invest in a guarenteed failure. If by chance it succeeds – as happens in the film – then off to jail you go … wait a minute!

Interesting piece, and like the magician’s trick you’ve in a piece of what 700 words, devoted three lines beginning and end, 10% or so to the ‘Gribkowsky Affair’. Clinically avoiding any mention of Mr Ecclestone, bribery or possible incarceration for the octogenarian.

Now thats either you being too clever by half or have you being mesmerised by the magician?

Round table time
Who can suggest any scenario where you would be forced to pay a 50 million bribe (With the justification that you were being “shook down”) – that didn’t involve you doing something massively illegal?

Duke Somerset – Went broke through bankrolling millions to the king out of his patriotic duty?

Bernie thought he was donating 50mil to a Eurozone bailout package to assist countries pay for his GPs?

The question I have is why would the Times agree to make this distraction? The reputation of the newspaper and the journalists is at the highest level the world over. I have never heard a bad word about the Times F1 journalist Kevin Eason and I often think his reports are the best of all of the newspaper reviews of F1. I can not understand why any of the journalists in F1 would agree to make a diversion which is so public that everyone can see it. Joe, have you ever heard Bernie asking for this? I understand that the journalists do not want to write negative things about him or the teams in case they lose passes or access but they do not have to help to build a diversion. What is the benefit for them?

With everyone slating the numbers on here, the cheapest grandstand tickets at Silverstone this year are around £250 for the weekend and £170 raceday. Say that is the average ticket price and the circuit has around 100,000 tickets available that leaves a ticket revenue of around £20million by time you work out % of tickets sold for raceday only that leave spare capacity on Friday/Saturday. This figure is even higher at a circuit such as Monaco where raceday tickets cos in excess of £400 – ticket revenue for London then could reach £35million+ Add to this that all circuit advertising revenue goes directly to FOM, In 2009, Delta 3 (F1’s commercial rights holder) posted revenues of $1.1Billion, of which around $900million came from promoters paying race-host fees and TV rights holders, leaving $200million for circuit advertising – around £8million per race on average. Inevitably premium events – Monaco, Silverstone, Singapore, Italy, Spa etc – go for more and arguably a London GP could attract in excess of £10million a year in advertising revenue. Add to this the revenue from hospitality, which would be a considerable revenue in London and the numbers dont actually sound quite so silly after all. The event could generate around £60million before Bernie even starts to bring extra clauses into the contract, after all as long as he can convince CVC that the benefits of the event outweigh the cost then it could be game on. In terms of global appeal a London GP would be huge and could potentially attract even more countries to join the – growing – list of countries queueing up to get a crack at the F1 pie. Maybe not quite as silly as you suggest sir…

You need an act of Parliament to close public roads for motor racing, how long will that take to get through? Then local authority approval is needed such as planning permissions, health and safety, etc and a large number of middle management men in suits all wanting to stick their oar in!

Why does it have to be London?
Why not Birmingham which already has the act of Parliament

At the fota forum last night the team bosses were asked about the possibility of a London gp. They all looked a little uncomfortable and before anyone could answer I said “smokescreen” just loud enough to hear. A smile anthem answer…. “in pleased you said that so don’t have too”. Next question…..